Sedona Smart Meter Awareness - Keeping Sedona Safe One Home & One Business at a Time
F A Q


The Issues B. Blake Levitt’s answers to 10 top questions you might have about the science, the animals, the towers, etc.



What is the Difference Between Radiation from the Sun and Radiowave Radiation?
The major difference between the radiation from the sun is it can’t penetrate walls. Radiowave radiation can penetrate buildings.  “Of the immense quantities of radiation that pervade the Universe and impinge on the Earth, only those in visible light and RADIO and a few in infrared are able to penetrate to the Earth’s surface.”

This is directly taken from NASA. “Various wavelengths of solar EM radiation penetrate Earth’s atmosphere to various depths. Fortunately for us, all of the high energy X-rays and most UV is filtered out long before it reaches the ground. Much of the infrared radiation is also absorbed by our atmosphere far above our heads. MOST RADIO WAVES DO MAKE IT TO THE GROUND, along with a narrow “window” of IR, UV, and visible light frequencies.”

Why is a Cell Phone is Not Like a "Smart" meter (http://sagereports.com)

Cell Phone                                 Cell tower/Smart Meter         
The FCC uses SAR.                             The FCC uses OET 65          
SAR defines safety limit                     Power Density safety limit 
Near field                                             Far field          
Localized                                              Whole-body          
Acute                                                    Chronic                                    
Voluntary                                              Involuntary          
You can use an earpiece                   You cannot reduce the RF          
You can use speakerphone              You cannot reduce the RF            
Body Burden =                                     Body Burden =                 
    1/2hr/day average                                   24-hour every day = uW/cm2/year                    
     US adult use of                                       Power transmitters added....                 
     Cell phone                                               0.18 W times 10-12 transmitters                 
     Could calculate                                      Could calculate uW/cm2/annual?                   
     uW/cm2/annual?                                     And compare them? Like we do                                                                                   in total mG/years? In epi studies?

A smart meter produces radiofrequency microwave radiation in approximately the same frequency range as typical cell tower (wireless antenna facility). 
The smart meter produces RF in all directions, rather than sectorized like cell towers with panel antennae (this means, RF from a smart meter goes out in all directions, not just in a beam in one or more specific directions, like a fell tower or WI-Max does).  
RF intensity from cell towers can vary (be reduced) if there is a big difference in elevation between the antennae on the cell tower, and the point of interest (a home, for example). 

Smart meters zap ya' right at eye level. or body level.  
Smart meters produce radiation at equal elevation to occupied space (the first floor of a home) and the outside areas of the property.  

Cell towers produce radiofrequency microwave radiation that affects people in a whole-body pattern (people are immersed in the RF over all the body).

Exposures are in the far-field (not the near-field like cell phones) so that RF levels are relatively predictable in intensity (except for any local reflections, which can greatly increase RF in unpredictable zones at distance from the RF source).  

A cell tower (T-Mobile example) with an effective radiated poser of 1480 watts at 1900 MHz creates a maximum RF level of 92 wM/cm2 (Antenna Model APX16DV)  

Maximum      
RF    92uWcm2at about 75'                        (At equal elevation)                   100'                                                                    about 70 uW/cm2 200'                                                                    about 20 uW/cm2 300'                                                                     about 8 uW/cm2 400'                                                                    about 4.6 uW/cm2 500'                                                                    about 3.8 uW/cm2 600'                                                                    about 1.9 uW/cm2 700'                                                                    about 1.4 uW/cm2 800'                                                                    about 1.04 uW/cm2 900'                                                                    about 0.8 uW/cm2 1000'                                                                  about 0.65 uW/cm2 1200'                                                                  about 0.45 uW/cm2 1400'                                                                  about 0.33 uW/cm2 1600'                                                                  about 0.25 uW/cm2 1800'                                                                  about 0.19 uW/cm2 2000'                                                                  about 0.16 uW/cm2  

Long-term exposure to whole-body radiofrequency and microwave radiation should not be considered benign or of no public health importance (Kundi and Hutter, 2009).

"The most important difference between mobile phone use and exposure from base station signals is duration of exposure. While mobile phones are used intermittently with exposure duration seldom exceeding 1 h per day, exposure to base stations is continuous and for up to 24 h a day.  It has also to be mentioned that the exposure of mobile phone users is in the near field and localized at the head region, which base stations expose the whole body to the far field. Strictly speaking exposure from mobile phones and their base stations have almost nothing in common except for the almost equal carrier frequency that is likely of no importance for biological effects."
 

"Despite some methodological limitations of the different studies there are still strong indications that long-term exposure near base stations affects wellbeing. Symptoms most often associated with exposure were headaches, concentration difficulties, restlessness, and tremor.  Sleeping problems were also related to distance from base station or power density, but it is possible that these results are confounded by concerns about adverse effects of the base station, or more generally, by specific personality traits.  While the data are insufficient to delineate a threshold for adverse effects the lack of observed effects at factions of a mW/m2 power density suggests that, at least with respect to wellbeing, around 0.5-1mW/m2 must be exceeded in order to observe an effect.  This figure is also compatible with experimental studies of wellbeing that found effects at 2.7 and 10mW/m2.

"Overall results of investigations into the effects of exposure to base station signals are mirroring the broader spectrum of studies on handsets and on RF-EMF in general.  There are indications from epidemiology that such exposures affect wellbeing and health weakly supported by human provocation studies and an inconclusive body of evidence from animal and in vitro studies."

Even the FCC's own consumer website is not updated to caution that exposures to cell phone frequency radiation from devices may warrant precautionary action by individuals.  Since these devices are cleared for use by the FCC on the basis that they comply with existing safety limits, it is instructive to learn that precautionary advice has been issued anyway, based on new reports that such limits are insufficient to protect public health.  

"Recent reports by some health and safety interest groups have suggested that wireless device use can be linked to cancer and other illnesses.  These questions have become more pressing as more and younger people are using the devices, and for longer periods of time.  No scientific evidence currently establishes a definite link between wireless device use and cancer or other illness, but almost all parties debating the risks of using wireless devices agree that more and longer-term studies are needed.  After listening to several expert witness, a United States Senate committee recently came to this same conclusion." "Even though no scientific evidence currently establishes a definite link between wireless device use and cancer or other illnesses, some parties recommend taking the precautions listed below. When considering these precautions, remember that your wireless device only emits RF energy when you are using it and that the closer the device is to you, the more energy you will absorb.  Also, some parties assert that any potential health risks are probably greater for children than for adults.  Finally, some experts think that low frequency magnetic fields rather than RF energy measured by the SAR possibly are responsible for any potential risk associated with wireless devices."

http://www.fcc.gov.cgb/consumerfacts/mobilephone.html

Neither the World Health Organization, nor the National Toxicology Program have issued their findings on the carcinogenicity and neurotoxicity of chronic exposure to low-intensity radiofrequency and microwave radiation.  Both institutions have on-going research programs to determine the toxicity of chronic exposures.  Current FCC public safety limits never anticipated wireless technology health impacts and no longer provide a basis for unilateral judgment of safety or risk.  For radiofrequency radiation exposures, they are based only on thermal heating injury to tissue (what burns, damages). 

They do not recognize or take into account non-thermal (or preferably, low-intensity) RF exposures that are reported to cause biological effects that can, with chronic exposure, reasonably be presumed to result in adverse health effects.   Compliance with existing and obsolete FCC standards for exposure to radiofrequency radiation is no longer a basis for assuring safety.  The City is clearly aware of international and national controversy  about the inadequacy of existing FCC and ICNIRP safety limits with respect to wireless technologies.   Plain Talk about Cell Phone (Sage, 2010) documents studies that show about a doubling of risk for malignant brain tumor (glioma) with 10 years or more cell phone use, ipsilateral, for adult; and a five-fold risk for children who use them as youngsters, by the time they are in the 20-29 age group.  this means any comparison of as smart meter to a cell phone is not only an incorrect comparison, but that if it were, cell phones are potentially carcinogenic with chronic exposure.  Hardly reassuring.  
                                                                                   
The issue with digital meters:

Digital Meters have a power switching supply creating a 2 KHz> field on the homes wiring. Here is a tech article explaining the difference between the two. http://www.analog.com/static/imported-files/tech_articles/16673279729875solid_state.pdf

Use a battery operated AM radio tuned to 530 KHz to detect dirty power. Here is a video demonstrating https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FAgNHirQhxc

There is a book about this subject called "Dirty Electricity"  http://www.sammilham.com/ I would suggest reading it for a better understanding of the health effects associated with these high frequency fields.  

Website Builder provided by  Vistaprint